TSTP Solution File: SEU173+1 by Etableau---0.67

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : Etableau---0.67
% Problem  : SEU173+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s

% Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 600s
% DateTime : Tue Jul 19 09:24:28 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.15s 0.34s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.10  % Problem  : SEU173+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.06/0.11  % Command  : etableau --auto --tsmdo --quicksat=10000 --tableau=1 --tableau-saturation=1 -s -p --tableau-cores=8 --cpu-limit=%d %s
% 0.09/0.30  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.30  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.30  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.30  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.30  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.30  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.30  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.09/0.30  % DateTime : Sun Jun 19 16:25:44 EDT 2022
% 0.09/0.30  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.15/0.33  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.15/0.33  # Auto-Mode selected heuristic G_E___208_C18_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.15/0.33  # and selection function SelectComplexExceptUniqMaxHorn.
% 0.15/0.33  #
% 0.15/0.33  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.15/0.33  # Number of axioms: 27 Number of unprocessed: 27
% 0.15/0.33  # Tableaux proof search.
% 0.15/0.33  # APR header successfully linked.
% 0.15/0.33  # Hello from C++
% 0.15/0.33  # The folding up rule is enabled...
% 0.15/0.33  # Local unification is enabled...
% 0.15/0.33  # Any saturation attempts will use folding labels...
% 0.15/0.33  # 27 beginning clauses after preprocessing and clausification
% 0.15/0.33  # Creating start rules for all 2 conjectures.
% 0.15/0.33  # There are 2 start rule candidates:
% 0.15/0.33  # Found 9 unit axioms.
% 0.15/0.33  # Unsuccessfully attempted saturation on 1 start tableaux, moving on.
% 0.15/0.33  # 2 start rule tableaux created.
% 0.15/0.33  # 18 extension rule candidate clauses
% 0.15/0.33  # 9 unit axiom clauses
% 0.15/0.33  
% 0.15/0.33  # Requested 8, 32 cores available to the main process.
% 0.15/0.33  # There are not enough tableaux to fork, creating more from the initial 2
% 0.15/0.33  # Returning from population with 12 new_tableaux and 0 remaining starting tableaux.
% 0.15/0.33  # We now have 12 tableaux to operate on
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 2 total branch saturation attempts.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 0 of these attempts blocked.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 0 deferred branch saturation attempts.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 0 free duplicated saturations.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 2 total successful branch saturations.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 0 successful branch saturations in interreduction.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 0 successful branch saturations on the branch.
% 0.15/0.34  # There were 2 successful branch saturations after the branch.
% 0.15/0.34  # SZS status Theorem for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/0.34  # SZS output start for /export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.15/0.34  # Begin clausification derivation
% 0.15/0.34  
% 0.15/0.34  # End clausification derivation
% 0.15/0.34  # Begin listing active clauses obtained from FOF to CNF conversion
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_18, plain, (empty(empty_set))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_23, plain, (empty(esk7_0))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_24, plain, (empty(esk8_1(X1)))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_27, plain, (subset(X1,X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_16, plain, (element(esk3_1(X1),X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_25, plain, (element(esk8_1(X1),powerset(X1)))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_19, negated_conjecture, (~element(esk4_0,powerset(esk5_0)))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_26, plain, (~empty(esk9_0))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_17, plain, (~empty(powerset(X1)))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (in(X1,esk5_0)|~in(X1,esk4_0))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_29, plain, (~empty(X1)|~in(X2,X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_28, plain, (X1=empty_set|~empty(X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_1, plain, (~in(X1,X2)|~in(X2,X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_21, plain, (empty(X1)|~empty(esk6_1(X1)))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_7, plain, (empty(X1)|~element(X1,X2)|~empty(X2))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_6, plain, (element(X1,X2)|~empty(X2)|~empty(X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_30, plain, (X1=X2|~empty(X2)|~empty(X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_22, plain, (element(esk6_1(X1),powerset(X1))|empty(X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_10, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~in(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_9, plain, (empty(X1)|in(X2,X1)|~element(X2,X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_8, plain, (element(X1,X2)|~in(X1,X2))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_12, plain, (in(X1,X2)|~subset(X3,X2)|~in(X1,X3))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_11, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|in(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_4, plain, (in(X1,powerset(X2))|~subset(X1,X2))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_5, plain, (subset(X1,X2)|~in(X1,powerset(X2)))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_2, plain, (X1=powerset(X2)|subset(esk1_2(X2,X1),X2)|in(esk1_2(X2,X1),X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_3, plain, (X1=powerset(X2)|~subset(esk1_2(X2,X1),X2)|~in(esk1_2(X2,X1),X1))).
% 0.15/0.34  # End listing active clauses.  There is an equivalent clause to each of these in the clausification!
% 0.15/0.34  # Begin printing tableau
% 0.15/0.34  # Found 7 steps
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_20, negated_conjecture, (in(esk5_0,esk5_0)|~in(esk5_0,esk4_0)), inference(start_rule)).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_33, plain, (in(esk5_0,esk5_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_1])).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_40, plain, (~in(esk5_0,esk5_0)), inference(closure_rule, [i_0_33])).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_34, plain, (~in(esk5_0,esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_9])).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_186, plain, (empty(esk4_0)), inference(extension_rule, [i_0_29])).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_188, plain, (~element(esk5_0,esk4_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_188, ...])).
% 0.15/0.34  cnf(i_0_190, plain, (~in(X4,esk4_0)), inference(etableau_closure_rule, [i_0_190, ...])).
% 0.15/0.34  # End printing tableau
% 0.15/0.34  # SZS output end
% 0.15/0.34  # Branches closed with saturation will be marked with an "s"
% 0.15/0.34  # Creating equality axioms
% 0.15/0.34  # Ran out of tableaux, making start rules for all clauses
% 0.15/0.34  # Child (13127) has found a proof.
% 0.15/0.34  
% 0.15/0.34  # Proof search is over...
% 0.15/0.34  # Freeing feature tree
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------